ISLAMABAD : The complaints filed by the Turkish textile manufacturers to impose anti-dumping duty on the import of textile goods from Pakistan have failed to comply with the basic legal requirements of Turkish Safeguard Laws (TSL) while the decision of the hearing against the anti-dumping may be announced in coming April.

Turkey has decided to levy anti-dumping duty on the textile imports from Pakistan, Bangladesh and China to save its local industry as the cost of production in Turkey is much higher which made it difficult for its textile sector to compete at low rates. Sources told Business Recorder here on Wednesday that almost 40 percent textile exports of Pakistan are feared to be anti-dumped in Turkey as our garments and fabric were available at low cost than that of Turkish local industry. The Turk authorities are accusing the Pakistani textile products of marring their local industry. So, Turkey has decided to increase the import duty on Pakistani garments from 9. 5 percent to 52 percent and on fabric from 6. 5 percent to 35 percent, sources disclosed.

Sources said that the hearing was held by the Turkish Under Secretariat. A large number of textile exporters from Pakistan attended the hearing along with foreign lawyers engaged from Turkey and Brussels. More than twenty Pakistani woven fabric exporters registered with the Turkish authorities, and this was the largest number of exporters of any country who were registered with the Turkish authorities. Sources disclosed, The presentations made by our foreign lawyers specifically dealt with the contradictions in the complaint and it was highlighted better than any other presentation. They pointed out that the data provided by the Turkish complainants was not based on a valid statistical basis. The data had been provided by thirty three companies without giving any further details about the companies . They said that the presentations explained that under the Turkish Safeguards Law there were three legal requirements which had to be met before duties could be imposed, namely, a surge in imports, suffering of the local industry and evidence to prove that the suffering had been caused by the surge in imports.

The presentations explained that in reality there was no surge at all. The so-called surge in imports was only appearing because in 2008 and 2009 there was world-wide recession and therefore imports into Turkey also dropped accordingly in this period. However, if the imports in 2010 were compared with imports in 2005 and 2006 there was no surge at all. The second requirement of damage to the local industry was also non-existent.

Even according to the complainants own data, both their profits and their capacity utilisation were higher in 2010 than they had been in 2005. Turkish government statistics were presented to show that Turkish textile manufacturers orders as well as turnover were continuously increasing contrary to their claim in the complaint. In order to rebut the complainants claim that their employment had dropped drastically in 2008 and 2009, the presentations showed that overall Turkish employment had also dropped by the same percentage in 2008 and 2009 as a result of the world-wide recession. It was therefore explained that the drop in the textile sector was due to the same cause and not because of the imports. It was also explained that raising the duty on fabrics would end up hurting the Turkish economy as this fabric was mainly used for conversion into garments which were then exported to Europe.

If the fabric became more expensive, Turkish garment manufacturers would not be able to compete with other countries and Turkey s exports would drop accordingly. In addition, Turkish local consumers would have to pay a higher price for the imported goods. Sources maintained that there was lot of pressure built on Turkish government to reduce and avoid Safeguard duty. It was further concluded that any duty may end up in a complaint at a WTO level and may cause problem to Turkish government in other trade measures agreement with EU. It was therefore submitted that the complainants had failed to meet the legal requirements of the Turkish law and therefore the complaint should be rejected. It is expected the decision will come sometime in April this year.

Source: Business Recorder